[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2023 08:30:36 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Andrey Albershteyn <aalbersh@...hat.com>
Cc: djwong@...nel.org, dchinner@...hat.com, ebiggers@...nel.org,
hch@...radead.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
fsverity@...ts.linux.dev, rpeterso@...hat.com, agruenba@...hat.com,
xiang@...nel.org, chao@...nel.org,
damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com, jth@...nel.org,
linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
cluster-devel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/23] fsverity: make fsverity_verify_folio() accept
folio's offset and size
On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 04:53:01PM +0200, Andrey Albershteyn wrote:
> Not the whole folio always need to be verified by fs-verity (e.g.
> with 1k blocks). Use passed folio's offset and size.
Why can't those callers just call fsverity_verify_blocks directly?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists